As a librarian nothing makes me happier than seeing people reading. Reading anything. Cereal boxes, supermarket tabloids, People magazine, instructions on how to assemble that toy Santa brought the kids for Christmas morning – anything. I’m also a very big supporter of popular fiction. Books that are fun to read. I firmly believe the reason more people don’t read is because they don’t realize that it should be fun. Reading shouldn’t be a chore, so find out what you like and stick with it.
It’s this love of popular fiction that has led me for the last couple of years to give reader’s advisory talks on the romance genre. Think of it as Romance Novels For Dummies. Tell people who don’t read romance why I love it so much in the hopes that maybe they’ll think about giving one a try. These experiences have led me to come to one startling conclusion:
It’s amazing more romance authors aren’t writing books from prison.
When I give one of these talks I would say about 99% of the audience is receptive, appreciative, and really feels like they’ve learned something. It’s that other 1% that throws the wrench in the works. Unfortunately that 1% also doesn’t know how to keep their mouths shut.
After one particular presentation I had a woman come up to me afterwards and heartily disagree with me about the term “bodice ripper.” I had carefully laid out why most writers and readers find the term insulting, and how most books that were labeled “bodice rippers” twenty years ago are extremely different from what is being published in the romance genre today. This woman proceeded to tell me that bodice rippers still made up the bulk of the genre because the books have “sex” in them. That’s right – any book with sex in it is a “bodice ripper.” Who knew? Wonder if anyone has told Oprah that she inadvertently selected some “bodice rippers” for her book club?
My most recent comment came from a woman who told me afterwards that I was wrong when I said romance novels weren’t “cookie cutter.” See, she’s never read a Harlequin, and never will, but she thought it would be fun to write one.
I’ll give you a minute to digest that absurd statement.
Anyway, she looked up the “writing guidelines” provided by Harlequin and that’s how she knows they’re all “cookie cutter” and “poorly written.” Besides the fact that Harlequin does not have a monopoly on the genre (there are a few more publishers out there), I’m sure it’s gratifying for all the Harlequin authors to find out that they’re not working hard on their writing. No need for pesky details like character or plot development – just fill in the blanks on the standard template while your kids take their afternoon nap.
I’m sad to report that I didn’t have pithy comments for either of these misguided souls. My initial reaction was to strangle them, but alas, I was representing the organization that I work for. The same organization that makes it possible for me to pay the rent, stay fed, and buy books – so I bit my tongue. Hard. I’ve got a bloody stump left.
But it did get me thinking – do I respect romance authors enough? I certainly have a great amount of respect for any writer. Writing is hard work. It takes patience, talent, and a strong work ethic. If I ever had a person come up to me and say, “When are you going to write a real book?” or “Isn’t writing a Harlequin just fill in the blank?” I’d be the latest crazy person featured on the 6 o’clock news. So how do authors maintain their sanity and sense of humor? Tequila? Vodka? Moonshine?
All of this brings back how desperate many readers and writers are for respect. We want non-romance readers to grant us a modicum of consideration. To engage their brain before they open their big mouth. That’s never going to happen, and the sooner we realize it, the happier we’ll be. I could have been angry with those women, and for a short time I was. Then I realized it wasn’t anger I felt, but something else - pity. They can’t help the stupid things they say, because they’re trapped in their narrow little world with only their narrow little minds to keep them company.
Yep, pity is the only way to go.
Maybe you should carry around a crate of books, and when someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about insists, “Romance is this,” you whip out the book that is the antithesis of whatever they just said.
And beat them over the head with it. Just sayin’.
by Kerry Allen April 27th, 2007 at 7:32 amGeeze, sex in books.
by Bernita April 27th, 2007 at 8:00 amLot of bodice rippers out there, eh?
I suppose I might have thought ( 3 days later) to say “I can’t believe you are equating romance novels with RAPE fantasies!”
I’m past the point in life where I want to try and convince someone to do something they don’t want to do especially when if I see them really grounded in their opinion.
I have always wondered what it would be like to hand out a romance novel without an author name with a plain blank cover, no blurb and ask a group of people, men and women, to read it. I’d love to get reactions. It would be a great experiment I think.
by Rosie April 27th, 2007 at 10:26 amExactly!!
by Tara Marie April 27th, 2007 at 10:55 amRosie and Tara Marie:
The older (and more stubborn) I get, the more I’ve learned to pick my battles. These two women had their heels dug in and no amount of me telling them how wrong they were was going to change their minds. That’s just the way it is. I don’t like it - but why waste my breath arguing with a load-bearing wall? My efforts, and the efforts of all romance readers and writers, are better served concentrating on that other, more receptive and open-minded 99%.
Kerry: Tempting to beat them over the head with books, but that goes back to my original problem. I’m typically representing the organization I work for when I give these talks and I like getting a paycheck every other week
Still, it’s very tempting.
Bernita: Exactly. Romance has hardly cornered the market on including sex scenes in books. They occur in every single genre and classification out there. And the way this woman was talking, the inclusion of bad, poorly written, vanilla sex makes a book a bodice ripper.
by Wendy April 27th, 2007 at 11:26 amTo some I can see where the extensive guidelines Harlequin have “might” appear to make cookie cutter books, but I know it is harder to make a story interesting and intriquing while staying in those guidelines.
by Jill April 27th, 2007 at 2:12 pmHarlequin has a fill-in-the-blank template???? Who knew??? Not me! I want one — then I can dispense with all the agony I expend trying to come up with a wondeful couple so totally wrong for each other they have to be right — oh, and if I had that template, then, sheesh, I wouldn’t have to worry about GMC or character development or …
Aaargh. I really HAVE had people say to me things like “templates” and “real books.” Thanks for realizing what we go through — and a really BIG thanks for trying to educate people — so many librarians just snub their nose at paperback romance.
by Cynthia Reese April 27th, 2007 at 3:22 pmI couldn’t agree with you more. Let’s not worry about the folks who will never respect romance writing. Let’s worry about the wonderful readers of romance (and in my case, romantic fantasy), giving them more of what they crave.
by Ciar Cullen April 27th, 2007 at 4:14 pmI’m very proud to be a romance writer. If people are like that with me I just say ‘what a shame you’re missing out on some great books’ and walk away.
by Nell Dixon April 27th, 2007 at 5:03 pm“The older (and more stubborn) I get, the more I’ve learned to pick my battles. These two women had their heels dug in and no amount of me telling them how wrong they were was going to change their minds. That’s just the way it is. I don’t like it - but why waste my breath arguing with a load-bearing wall?”
by FrancescaH April 28th, 2007 at 10:56 am***
Wendy,
Normally I’d agree with you. However…. What if these two women are library directors or acquisitions managers. Their entrenched attitudes then affect not just them but their entire community. Yeah, I’m a librarian, and I’ve worked with librarians who called romance “trash” reading and one director who would only build the romance collection through donation. He had twenty year old series romances in the collection and then used the arguement that the romances didn’t circ (check out) so why build the collection. I tried to beat my head against the wall on that one. I asked to weed the collection - no go. I looked at every donation that came in to make sure he was keeping romances rather than putting them on the sale shelf. He was a great guy - but blind on this issue. Even when the individual is stuck in their blind spot sometimes it pays to try to get them to see the light.
I don’t think romance writers are given nearly the due they deserve. And sadly - probably not enough from me either. I’m still ‘in the closet’ to a lot of my friends as to my reading preferences. But I’ve been reading like a fiend ever since I discovered the world of Dick and Jane and their dog Spot. I’ve read every genre there is to read at one time or another and for me without question, many romance writers are heads above so many of the other main stream writers out there. Their writing is better, their characters are so much more real, their descriptions more vivid. I stick pretty much to romance only these days. One of the main reasons of course is the HEA I’m guaranteed. But another big reason plain and simple, is the superior writing they show!!!!
by Kristie(J) April 28th, 2007 at 10:56 amFrancesca:
To me this is a different problem. That director isn’t doing his job. I’m going to go out on a limb here and speculate he’s been in that role for a long time. Over 10 years at least. At this point he won’t change his mind and the library patrons are suffering for it. It’s been my experience that when librarians say romance is “trash,” they tend to look down on genre fiction as a whole. And don’t even suggest to them that they might want to start acquiring graphic novels!
The only real solution I see for this is that these people need to retire. Or move on. There’s a lot to be said for fresh blood. Also, it’s going to take the people who “really matter” - library patrons - to make any sort of difference. And since romance readers are fed up with being smacked around, looked down upon, and treated like 3rd class citizens it’s not likely to happen.
Can you tell this is a pet peeve?
I’ve worked with managers who have 1) become stagnant and 2) refused to see the writing on the wall when it comes to collection development. Yes, librarians believe in education. Yes, we want people to read quality. But honestly, it’s also our job to provide them with “quality” entertainment and there’s a lot of quality in genre fiction. They just refuse to see it.
by Wendy April 28th, 2007 at 12:11 pmHey, better to pity them than the alternative: Knocking on doors, trying to convert non-believers (think Jehovah’s Witnesses.) Good grief!
Bettye Griffin
by Bettye Griffin May 1st, 2007 at 9:09 pmhttp://www.bettyegriffin.com
http://www.chew-the-fat-with-Bettye.blogspot.com
As always, I am late to the party. But you’ve covered most of the ground except for one bit, which is to ask these women why are they automatically putting down the work of other women?
Really, there is a political subtext here.
Additionally, romance writers embrace their heroines’ femininity completely by including sex in their stories. It obviously threatens the heck out of some women. It’s worth asking why. Why is the sex so scary?
by Poison Ivy May 5th, 2007 at 11:56 am